rubic_get_bridge_quotes

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Get all available...' without revealing response format, potential latency, error behavior, pagination, or whether the routes include fees and estimated times. This is minimal behavioral context for a complex external API call.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no redundant words. It earns its place by conveying the core action and resource, though it could be slightly more informative without becoming verbose.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The tool has 10 parameters and no output schema, but the description does not explain return values, what constitutes a 'route', or how optional params like slippage/testnets affect results. This is incomplete for a tool of this complexity.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% with detailed parameter descriptions, so the description need not repeat them. The description adds no extra meaning about parameters, but the baseline of 3 is appropriate since the schema already handles semantics.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool retrieves all available cross-chain bridge routes for token swaps, using the specific verb 'Get' and a well-defined resource. It distinguishes from singular 'quote' tools but does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like rubic_get_bridge_quote or get_bridge_quote, which may also return route options.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention when to choose this over rubic_get_bridge_quote, get_bridge_status, or execute_bridge, nor does it specify conditions like requiring fresh quotes or comparing multiple routes.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.